I would disagree somewhat. Jesus wept when he arrived at the tomb of Lazarus, although he knew that he was about to raise him from the dead. I think that was a way of Jesus acknowledging his humanity and granting us the permission to mourn. Emotional release is good. And if it is inspired by somebody prayerfully raising a voice in song it is perhaps the best of circumstances. This is particularly true at funerals where a lot of those present may have little or no religious foundation. You are singing on their behalf. Congratulations on prayer well said.

The texts of the propers and the tone of the melodies, sometimes somber, sometimes tender, do lend themselves to the expression of sorrow. I heard some of the propers sung in English at a Mass in Maine a few days ago, and the family's grieving was very noticeable: for example, in the In paradisum.

The parish musicians are using settings from By Flowing Waters.

Lest we forget, and not to sound cold, but the primary purpose of the funeral liturgy, indeed all of the rites surrounding Christian burial, is not catharsis or to elicit an emotional response, it is to pray for the repose of the soul of the one who died, and to offer the Mass in partial propitiation for the sins they committed. Tears may be a natural part of the grief we feel and experience, but the music shouldn't become a means of generating an emotional response.

I subscribe to a simple maxim about funerals-in whatever environs whatever chickens were raised, and however they were raised (in cages or free-running along dirt roads)- they all come home to roost at funerals. One can expect King Chanticleer to occupy the first pew but get Chicken Little, or Foghorn Leghorn and Penny Henny instead.
There are just way too many "dispositions" on the part of all "players" (including "Father") that are dealt with at funerals, that telling archetypal anecdotes that are somewhere between odes and laments of funeral singers seems sort of futile to me. Probably just me.
I think we have have one clear dictum that goes with my maxim- do what we do with great bearing and dignity. As I read in a combox over at InsideCatholic today, "The Church (the Mass) should never be the actual scene of a battleground."

Geeze, I don't know, Kathy. When y'all start in on Dies Irae for me, there'd better be some weeping and gnashing of teeth. Day of Wrath, indeed...

I don't think there's a problem with crying or catharsis - it's part of the grieving process. I certainly needed it at some point at both of my parents' deaths. I don't think it's a bad thing for that to happen at the Funeral Mass. It would certainly be nice if people understood what was happening, though. But that will never happen with the current Rite of Christian Burial. It's all about the last resurrection - as if it's happened already! Thank you very much American bishops and ICEL - but I will insist on an EF Requiem Mass, even without any music. I know that I will need all the prayers I can get to help me through purgatory! And just a few tears wouldn't hurt!

It is interesting to note that, despite the fulminations of his own Dies Iræ, Giuseppe Verdi also directed that only the chants be sung at his funeral. There was to be no instrumental music or operatic singing.

Some have speculated he did it in order to avoid the clash of titanic egos that would have overshadowed the process of deciding who would sing. My humble opinion is that, although you might find many a touching moment in his 24 operas, the composer recognized the superiority of the chant for the sacred liturgy.

It's normal to cry at any Mass. It's not just for funerals. Really. St. Ignatius Loyola, though a notably tough cookie, recorded in his spiritual journal having had the gift of tears at Mass scads of times. There's tons of times at any given Mass when you'll see someone get wrought up for no visible or audible reason. Why? Because we make ourselves vulnerable to God at Mass, and He walks right in and does stuff. If we could look into people's heads, we'd probably see Him tinkering with people's thoughts and emotions all over the place.

You know what makes people cry, lots of times? Just plain ordinary concentrated singing, or plain mindfully played music. That's it. Heck, it makes people cry more than pulling out all the emotional stops. Looking honestly at any true thing can make people cry, especially if people are not at all used to seeing true things. (Also, as actors are taught, "The less you cry, the more they will.") So if you just sing naked good music with naked plainness, people will cry. If you sing ornamentation gracefully, people will cry. It happens all the time, whether you see it happen or not. If you worry about it, you will just get distracted.

Certainly funeral music shouldn't be wielded purposefully to be all sobby, and neither should any Mass music. But it's not like there's any way to stop people from crying entirely, except maybe by being laughably bad -- and even that might move people. So you may as well quit worrying and let the Holy Spirit do whatever it feels like with people's tear ducts.

Maureen, do not confuse tears of compunction with tears driven by mawkishness or cloying sentimentality.

Typically music that is selected for a funeral in place of the appointed chants elicits the latter rather than the former.

Why are we having a discussion that qualifies and quantifies the ratio of tears shed to musical repertoire at funerals?
By all means, opine away. But to pontificate, occasionally with no small amount of snark, smacks of an ironic irrationality.

No one's in particular, David. As I said before, I've come to accept that all things funeral can be liturgically "all over the map" and that often the best we can do, after our sincerest efforts at consultation and collaboration, is accept that which we've been assigned to do, and do it to the best of our abilities.
I would clarify my "chickens to roost" analogy by better stating that this is likely the tenderest, most intimate subject matter pertaining to providing musical service to the Faithful. I just believe that factor alone should give us pause before we launch into the what/why/hows of shedding tears in theological, liturgical and aesthetic contexts.

We're on the same page.
Now that "chickens coming home to roost" (emotion-driven issues) is addressed, should we go onto "the swallows return to Capistrano" of liturgy, which is made most manifest by the gynormous mobs of folks who JUST HAVE TO GET THEIR ASHES on Ash Wednesday, or ELSE?!!! (Who also likely don't even show up on Easter/Christmas, much less Sundays as well!)

Nah. We should just play nice.
Thanks, David, for your clarification of music's foremost service to the liturgy, not the people.

Re: liturgical music is directed to God

Yes, of course. But that doesn't mean there's not blowback onto the interested "active participants" out in the congregation.

Re: do congregational tears come from sentimentality or what?

Not my problem. I strive not to play a telepathic spiritual director even on the Internet, and I'm sure as heck not equipped for it in real life.

However, I stand by my point. People do cry, often and often, if you just sing in their presence honestly and well, or that has been my experience. If the music is something particularly impressive to them, they will cry even if your singing stinks like rotten fish, so long as the music shines through, and they will say very kind things afterward. (At which point you just have to be prepared to smile graciously and thank folks even while wanting to slit your wrists.)

Of course, it's possible that I just make people want to slit _their_ wrists, or I remind them of their grandchildren, or I run into lots of listeners with very low thresholds of being impressed. It's also possible that I've got secret mezzo mind control powers. But criminy, I swear to you that I do nothing but sing half-decently, and tears is what I get tons of. And they don't strike me as being particularly emotional people, on the whole. All I can think is that people are very vulnerable to the blow-back of sacred music and half-decent singing. Which, given this culture's malnutrition of people's spirits, is probably true.

Re: impressive effect of chant

Although I like chant and polyphony an awful lot, and although I think really sacred music is really the best, I will say that I've heard all sort of things made solemn and prayerful by musicians making it so. Making your music a real prayer to God covers a multitude of musical sins. (As much as it can, anyway.) And although there is a difference between, say, a CMAA colloquium requiem Mass and a funeral featuring "On Eagle's Wings" done in as solemn a way as can be mustered, it's a difference of degree (albeit lots and lots of degrees!) and not of kind. And I have to be able to feel that way. I'm just some chick in the choir. I don't get to choose the music for funerals or any Masses, or even really suggest. What I can do is control my own attitude and approach. What I can't do is despair and not try. (And it's not as if things are all that bad in my parish, so that's not really too hard.)

That said, it is true that it is easier to worship in song in solemnity and prayerfulness when the music is giving you one heck of a hand up.

"In Paradisum" is incredibly beautiful, and sort of wistful, too. "Dies Irae" is an incredibly powerful prayer-ballad, with a very primal chant tune that seems to roll out of the earth. Whether or not people know anything about chant, they certainly hear that, and feel it down to the soles of their shoes. Which is why they show up in videogames and movie soundtracks -- because they're powerful, and their emotional and musical power is something soundtrack people like to try to harness!

But anyway, I stand by my general point from before. There's no point worrying about whether people cry or not at funerals. To forbid or encourage is way beyond my level of competence or responsibility. So I'm doubly not going to worry about whether music sets people off, or if it was the great-grandkid in front who looks just like Uncle Joe did at that age.

Two funerals at our place in the last week. 1. A beloved choir member: Prelude: Now thank we all our God Bach/Fox Anthem "Unto Thy Word' Haan, Entrance Hymn:'Jerusalem my happy home, Ps 63 Guimont, Offertory "The Lord is my shepherd' Rutter with harp and oboe. In paradisum Faure with instr. closing 'For all the saints', Recessional finale Sym #5 Vierne. All the music was her request. A full choir was present.
#2. Music (actually it was a prayer service, not a Mass.) How great Thou art, Amazing Grace, Celtic Alleluia/chant Some Baptist Praise song I never heard of, and at least, R&A setting of the 23rd Psalm. I was not a participant. I did put the cantor book together. :)

Donna

I understand that. That's why the Divine Liturgy - the Mass - MUST transcend our mundane, work-a-day world. The Mass, as God's existence, is outside of time. But therein lies the problem with the current "style" of Mass, which permeates the Rite of Christian Burial. It's all about us and Father Presider, and the immediate culture around us.

IOW, if the people in the pews can't comprehend transcendence at each and every Mass, then they will not comprehend the transcendence represented in the funeral Mass either. The overall effect is one of celebration of the departed's life as if s/he is already fully in God's presence, i.e. in no need of extra prayers. We should all be glad s/he is in heaven - because God is all merciful.

In the New Rite - it's a done deal.

In the Old Rite - it's an important transition.